“If you wait by the river long enough, the bodies of your enemies will float by.”
― Sun Tzu
The other day, this brief article was brought to my attention (full version for subscribers only and I’m not a subscriber). The article said that Sasha Charles of Landlord Advice UK had been convicted of pretending to be a solicitor.
Those who have been reading NL for a while may recall Sasha Charles and Landlord Advice UK from this 2019 post in which Landlord Advice were found to have been conducting litigation while unauthorised to do so (and nearly screwing up their client’s case in doing this) and also ripping off my posts on NL without permission or even a request.
(Hilariously, after I had sent a letter of claim, and Sasha Charles had amended the offending posts – adding a legal error, but that was his problem – I had an email saying
For reasons set out above we seek for the removal of or amendment to the above statement (my blog post – NL) and removal of your tweets referring to this matter given that the issues complained of have been resolved, we have not copied your blog posts and our right to privacy.
For avoidance of doubt, you are the only intended recipient of this e-mail, it should not be disclosed to any third party or published directly or indirectly.
We have remedied the issues you have complained of and reasonably expect you will also remove the tweets and amend your blog post accordingly which we complain of without recourse to further correspondence or litigation to enable the efficient disposal of this matter as a whole.
Quite what right to privacy there is in copyright infringement escapes me, as does any basis for asserting confidentiality in open pre-action correspondence, but then Mr Charles is not a lawyer and has the convictions to prove it…)
In fact, looking back, I had had a 2018 run in with Sasha Charles on twitter, in which he proclaimed his expertise in housing law while demonstrating his lack of it, as well as ringing alarm bells about whether he was crossing the line into carrying out regulated activities. He was also an arrogant idiot, but then in terms of twitter, this was hardly a unique distinguishing feature.
So, intrigued if not surprised, but unable to find any other reports about this conviction, I contacted the Solicitors Regulation Authority press office to find out more, presuming that the SRA must have been the prosecuting authority.
Here is what the SRA told me:
Mr Sasha Charles and Landlord Advice UK (Commercial) Ltd (LAUK) (of which Mr Charles is a former director and currently a person with significant control) appeared before Westminster Magistrates’ Court for sentence on 22 May 2025. Mr Charles had originally pleaded guilty on 16 April 2025.
The Chief Magistrate sentenced as follows:
For Mr Charles personally:
- 6 months imprisonment, reduced to 4 months for early guilty plea, suspended for two years. The assessment was that culpability was high and harm was low overall
- 15 rehabilitation activity requirement days
- 100 hours unpaid work
- Sentence concurrent on each charge
- To pay Victim surcharge: £122.00
- To pay Costs: £3,000.00 to be paid over 3 years. Costs reduced due to means and affordability
For LAUK:
- £20,000.00 fine, reduced to £18,000.00 due to mitigation and further reduced to £12,000.00 for early guilty plea
- Sentence concurrent (the fine was imposed on the first charge and no separate penalty for the other charges)
- To pay Victim surcharge: £181.00
- Costs: all tied in the above, no separate costs as costs imposed on Mr Charles personally to cover both him and the company.
If it helps, concerns were raised with us by the courts and at least one “client” that on various dates between April 2017 and April 2023, Mr Charles was alleged to have carried on a reserved legal activity – namely litigation – by conducting housing proceedings in various county courts when he was not entitled to carry out that activity, in breach of section 14 LSA 2007.
The activities were also undertaken through entities using the name Landlord Advice UK. While we prosecuted Mr Charles individually, we also prosecuted Landlord Advice UK (Commercial) Ltd as Mr Charles is currently a person with significant control.
As you’ll know, conducting litigation, usually on behalf of landlords against tenants, in circumstances where he was not authorised to do so, would make it unlikely that he would have had adequate insurance, and nor would his “clients” have had an established route for complaint about the service received. Qualifying as a solicitor also requires a degree-level qualification, and four years of academic and vocational training.
There are no specific sentencing guidelines for the offences in this case, the Chief Magistrate placed the defendant’s culpability at high, on the basis of the planning, deception and period of time the offending took place. The Chief Magistrate said the public needed confidence in the legal profession and the defendant’s actions had significant impact on that. This elevated the seriousness of the case overall.
The county courts where litigation was conducted were nationwide, but mainly in the London area.
So there we are. Not ‘pretending to be a solicitor’ per se, but the offence of carrying out a reserved legal activity – the conduct of litigation – when not entitled to do so. Sasha Charles had clearly not learned anything from his 2019 debacle but carried on the same way, adding an utter careless as to his clients’ best interests to arrogance and stupidity.
*If you are wondering, the title for this post is a direct quote from the Landlord Advice UK website. That site also notably says
“We are dedicated to supporting landlords and property owners with integrity and transparency.”
I think that may need some editorial revision…
Splendidly, Landlord Advice UK have (had?) a “guaranteed eviction service for a fixed fee”, except that only applies if the tenant doesn’t defend or not if the court adjourns the first hearing with directions. So not guaranteed at all. There is no mention of getting pleadings struck out for unauthorised conduct of litigation…
Unqualified, unregulated ‘evictions R us’ outfits are, frankly, a menace. A menace for their landlord clients. Sasha Charles may be a very dimwitted example, but he is far from the only one.
I see this daily, self proclaimed eviction ‘experts’ and ‘specialist’ promising landlords the world. But knowing very little of the process.
I have had a number of deposit protection cases created by these so called experts who didn’t understand the basics.
At least I know my limits and so do my clients